Discussion:
[FOAR] Our Amateur License System is Obsolete
(too old to reply)
Spike
2017-08-05 12:42:25 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Foundations of Amateur Radio
///////////////////////////////////////////
Our Amateur License System is Obsolete
Ours in the UK is broken.
Posted: 15 Jul 2017 10:00 AM PDT
Foundations of Amateur Radio
Recently I made a point of coming up with
three different names for License Classes in Australia. I proposed Low
Power, Medium Power and High Power and then went on to suggest that this
could also be a mechanism to update the framework that is Amateur
Licensing in Australia. As it turns out, I'm told that this idea is
mostly already active in the United Kingdom.
Is it? I thought the UK licenses were Foundation, Intermediate, and Full.
My idea started as a
response to an increasing clamour for more privileges for Foundation
Licenses.
Nothing new there then. It's easier to clamour than study for and sit
another two exams.
These calls include demands for digital modes and more power.
I understand this demand, though I don't particularly share it.
Gimme gimme gimme
I think that licenses evolve and the world in which they operate changes and
that digital modes are an example of that. I have a much bigger problem
with the way that licensees are using their level of license to look
down on those who have "only" achieved their Foundation or Standard
call.
I don't have a problem with this at all. "Get off your backsides and
study" might be a better way forward. After all, the answers are printed
under the questions, how hard can it be?
I have personally been told that I should get rid of my silly
license and upgrade and it's unusual to meet a new Amateur who doesn't
straight off the bat ask me why I haven't upgraded yet.
Good question.
I've seen the > same behaviour toward Standard licensees and I think it's a
fundamentally wrong attitude and approach to have.
Nope. People wanted levels so that they could get a licence the easiest
way and then 'clamour' for what they can't be arsed otherwise to achieve.
In my opinion this
is a hobby for participants to do what they want to do within the
constraints that they have. For some that means getting a higher level
of responsibility, for others it means spending time doing deep learning
and investigating the boundaries of their achievement.
Emotive claptrap.
The notion that
there are different levels of license is completely arbitrary and the
idea that some are better than others is ludicrous in my opinion.
My opinion is different.
Just
because I have a Foundation License, doesn't mean that I am ignorant and
just because others have an Advanced License, doesn't make them
all-knowing or expert.
The UK experience would agree with some of that. Some Fulls turn up
knowing FA.
If that wasn't enough, the boundaries between
license classes are completely subjective, drawn from historic
demarcations between VHF and HF, between Build and Buy and between
Morse-Code and Not. These lines are getting so silly that they have
become meaningless, to the point of absurdity.
According to you.
If I as a Foundation
License holder can go to a shop and buy a Software Defined Radio, then
update the software on that radio by using my skills as a programmer, I
have fundamentally changed the way the radio operates, even-though I
didn't once touch a soldering iron, or open the case. Our regulations
have nothing to say on the subject, nor is there any sane way to police
such an activity and nor should there be - this is an experimental hobby
after-all. If I buy a radio in kit form and get it shipped to me, put
it all together and turn it on, did I build something, or buy a
commercially available radio? Where's the line between building and
buying commercially available and what at the end of the day does it
really matter?
I think you are merely showing that you don't understand the point of
the regulations.
What is so special about the 20m band that prevents me
as a mere Foundation Licensee to access that band
Propagation.
and what is so amazing
about digital modes that make it that I'm not allowed to use it, even
though all digital modes are really just analogue audio and there is no
certification, training or assessment related to digital modes for any
class of license? My point is that the current licensing system is in
my opinion obsolete, it's broken and the persistent baying from the
sidelines by Amateurs who think that I'm demanding more privileges is
getting tiresome. It's ludicrous to think that we should remain back in
the 1970's, when Novice Licenses were introduced, perhaps while we're at
it, should we go back to a spark-gap transmitter too? The idea that
your enjoyment in the hobby is affected by my privileges is absurd to
the level of being offensive and if you're threatened by my
participation in the hobby, it seems to me that I must be making valid
points.
I don't see that at all.
I don't want more privileges. I'm happy with what I have. What
I want to do is make this hobby better, make it relevant, make it
useful, make it accessible and...
Christ on a bike. 'More accessible'....just give licenses away with the
bloody cornflakes, if you want 'accessibility'.
This posting includes
A lot of self-serving claptrap.
--
Spike
mw/3/
2017-08-05 13:02:33 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
I proposed Low
Power, Medium Power and High Power
And there lies the key.

Nothng else matters to some people - Watts Watts Watts
Gareth's Downstairs Computer
2017-08-05 13:47:34 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mw/3/
I proposed Low
Power, Medium Power and High Power
And there lies the key.
Nothng else matters to some people - Watts Watts Watts
3 watts; traditionally the QRP output power in Brit
mw/3/
2017-08-05 13:06:11 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Spike
A lot of self-serving claptrap.
Remids me of the various articles years ago about how wonderful the
foundation licence was.

Even OFCOM got in on the act but in their effort only highlighted that a
huge proportion of the farce licence had been issued to b-licensees!


You couldn't make it up!
Gareth's Downstairs Computer
2017-08-05 13:48:35 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by mw/3/
Post by Spike
A lot of self-serving claptrap.
Remids me of the various articles years ago about how wonderful the
foundation licence was.
Even OFCOM got in on the act but in their effort only highlighted that a
huge proportion of the farce licence had been issued to b-licensees!
You couldn't make it up!
After issuance, they became c-licensees and the butt of everlasting
derision.
Brian Reay
2017-08-05 15:50:04 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Spike
Foundations of Amateur Radio
///////////////////////////////////////////
Our Amateur License System is Obsolete
Ours in the UK is broken.
Posted: 15 Jul 2017 10:00 AM PDT
Foundations of Amateur Radio
Recently I made a point of coming up with three different names for
License Classes in Australia. I proposed Low Power, Medium Power and
High Power and then went on to suggest that this could also be a
mechanism to update the framework that is Amateur Licensing in
Australia. As it turns out, I'm told that this idea is mostly already
active in the United Kingdom.
Is it? I thought the UK licenses were Foundation, Intermediate, and Full.
My idea started as a response to an increasing clamour for more
privileges for Foundation Licenses.
Nothing new there then. It's easier to clamour than study for and sit
another two exams.
These calls include demands for digital modes and more power. I
understand this demand, though I don't particularly share it.
Gimme gimme gimme
I think that licenses evolve and the world in which they operate
changes and that digital modes are an example of that. I have a much
bigger problem with the way that licensees are using their level of
license to look down on those who have "only" achieved their
Foundation or Standard call.
I don't have a problem with this at all. "Get off your backsides and
study" might be a better way forward. After all, the answers are printed
under the questions, how hard can it be?
I have personally been told that I should get rid of my silly license
and upgrade and it's unusual to meet a new Amateur who doesn't
straight off the bat ask me why I haven't upgraded yet.
Good question.
I've seen the > same behaviour toward Standard licensees and I think it's a
fundamentally wrong attitude and approach to have.
Nope. People wanted levels so that they could get a licence the easiest
way and then 'clamour' for what they can't be arsed otherwise to achieve.
In my opinion this is a hobby for participants to do what they want to
do within the constraints that they have. For some that means getting
a higher level of responsibility, for others it means spending time
doing deep learning and investigating the boundaries of their
achievement.
Emotive claptrap.
The notion that there are different levels of license is completely
arbitrary and the idea that some are better than others is ludicrous
in my opinion.
My opinion is different.
Just because I have a Foundation License, doesn't mean that I am
ignorant and just because others have an Advanced License, doesn't
make them all-knowing or expert.
The UK experience would agree with some of that. Some Fulls turn up
knowing FA.
If that wasn't enough, the boundaries between license classes are
completely subjective, drawn from historic demarcations between VHF
and HF, between Build and Buy and between Morse-Code and Not. These
lines are getting so silly that they have become meaningless, to the
point of absurdity.
According to you.
If I as a Foundation License holder can go to a shop and buy a
Software Defined Radio, then update the software on that radio by
using my skills as a programmer, I have fundamentally changed the way
the radio operates, even-though I didn't once touch a soldering iron,
or open the case. Our regulations have nothing to say on the subject,
nor is there any sane way to police such an activity and nor should
there be - this is an experimental hobby after-all. If I buy a radio
in kit form and get it shipped to me, put it all together and turn it
on, did I build something, or buy a commercially available radio?
Where's the line between building and buying commercially available
and what at the end of the day does it really matter?
I think you are merely showing that you don't understand the point of
the regulations.
What is so special about the 20m band that prevents me as a mere
Foundation Licensee to access that band
Propagation.
and what is so amazing about digital modes that make it that I'm not
allowed to use it, even though all digital modes are really just
analogue audio and there is no certification, training or assessment
related to digital modes for any class of license? My point is that
the current licensing system is in my opinion obsolete, it's broken
and the persistent baying from the sidelines by Amateurs who think
that I'm demanding more privileges is getting tiresome. It's ludicrous
to think that we should remain back in the 1970's, when Novice
Licenses were introduced, perhaps while we're at it, should we go back
to a spark-gap transmitter too? The idea that your enjoyment in the
hobby is affected by my privileges is absurd to the level of being
offensive and if you're threatened by my participation in the hobby,
it seems to me that I must be making valid points.
I don't see that at all.
I don't want more privileges. I'm happy with what I have. What I want
to do is make this hobby better, make it relevant, make it useful,
make it accessible and...
Christ on a bike. 'More accessible'....just give licenses away with the
bloody cornflakes, if you want 'accessibility'.
This posting includes
A lot of self-serving claptrap.
Your responses most certainly are. Not to put to fine a point on it,
they read like the ramblings of a demented idiot- which is hardly
surprising as you seem to be demented and an idiot.

Loading...